跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.08144 · v1

Detecting Silent Faults at the Environment-Trainer Boundary in Reinforcement Learning

首次提交 2026-11-05 23:05
版本更新 2026-11-05 23:05
雷达观测 2026-11-06 12:09
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Robot reinforcement learning increasingly runs environments outside the trainer: in another process, on another machine, in another language. Many faults at this boundary raise no error. We make the boundary a wire protocol and ask what notices a fault in it. On Pendulum, HalfCheetah, Hopper and a 7-joint arm (Pusher), we injected up to 23 faults into what crosses the wire and 2 into the trainer's log, from one value to every value. Unless every value was wrong, a learning-curve threshold caught at most one run in ten, and a comparison with ten fault-free seeds at most 21%. A clean evaluation of all 1,060 final policies agreed with the curves: of the 728 boundary-fault runs both curve checks passed, 723 scored no more than three standard deviations below fault-free seeds, though nearly all ended on other weights and, for reward faults, logged other returns. Checks of the run itself, not of its outcome, saw every fault. A step ledger kept on both sides and compared step by step caught and located every fault that crossed, on Pendulum, Hopper and Pusher on one machine and on Pendulum across two, with no fault-free run and, on Pendulum, a median 3% more training time. An episode record kept at the environment caught the faults in the trainer's log. We list such faults found in practice, in Gymnasium 1.3 and our own code and, reported by others, in five multi-agent libraries, and recommend a step ledger and episode counts kept at the environment.

作者备注:7 pages, 6 figures, 6 tables. Accepted to the CoRL 2026 Workshop on Everything Beneath the Policy. Code, specification, and every experiment's protocol, logs and findings: https://github.com/PlugRL

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-05 23:05 · 最新观测版本

Detecting Silent Faults at the Environment-Trainer Boundary in Reinforcement Learning

Robot reinforcement learning increasingly runs environments outside the trainer: in another process, on another machine, in another language. Many faults at this boundary raise no error. We make the boundary a wire protocol and ask what notices a fault in it. On Pendulum, HalfCheetah, Hopper and a 7-joint arm (Pusher), we injected up to 23 faults into what crosses the wire and 2 into the trainer's log, from one value to every value. Unless every value was wrong, a learning-curve threshold caught at most one run in ten, and a comparison with ten fault-free seeds at most 21%. A clean evaluation of all 1,060 final policies agreed with the curves: of the 728 boundary-fault runs both curve checks passed, 723 scored no more than three standard deviations below fault-free seeds, though nearly all ended on other weights and, for reward faults, logged other returns. Checks of the run itself, not of its outcome, saw every fault. A step ledger kept on both sides and compared step by step caught and located every fault that crossed, on Pendulum, Hopper and Pusher on one machine and on Pendulum across two, with no fault-free run and, on Pendulum, a median 3% more training time. An episode record kept at the environment caught the faults in the trainer's log. We list such faults found in practice, in Gymnasium 1.3 and our own code and, reported by others, in five multi-agent libraries, and recommend a step ledger and episode counts kept at the environment.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗